Hacker News Reader

I don't think the point is that nobody needs to understand the theory. The point is that 3-5 years of analysis might be an overkill in most of practical situations.

Numerical methods are quite well-studied by now. If you need a new method or a variation then you probably specialise in these things, and that's a different question.

View on HN

It's really not. No problem looks exactly like the textbook you have to use analytical knowledge to devise a solution.

> The point is that 3-5 years of analysis might be an overkill

Rarely have I met an engineer and said, wow that guy knows TOO much about math. What do you think they should substitute?

I didn't say "too much math" :-) if anything, I'd like MORE math.

But the amount of time available is fundamentally limited and it has to be balanced.

E.g., in my personal circumstances probability theory, statistics, deeper proof understanding would all be useful. I had all of these at varying depths.

But it's only analysis that we were getting for years and years and years...

And I see why and how this is such an important subject historically. It's just not that big anymore relative to other things.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com